zer p.m., or sunday at 3:00 p.m.. u can s it twice! that is here, that's it for us on "the five." thank you for watching. see you monday. captioned by closed captioning services, inc >> chris: i'm chris wallace in for bret baier. this is a fox news alert. there is late-breaking news on the debt talks. house speaker john boehner once again has broken off negotiations with president obama. boehner will now try to work out a deal with senate leaders to keep the country from going into default. and president obama is expected in the white house briefing room at any moment. to give his reaction. senior white house foreign affairs correspondent wendell goler is live at the white house with the latest. this has all broken in the last few minutes. >> reporter: you are right, chris. a source in the speaker's office says mr. boehner felt that president obama wasn't serious about what is being called "the big deficit reduction deal." the three, to $3.5 trillion

measure over ten years. officials here, i believe, would tell you that the issue is the tax revenue that the president says has to be a part of the package to keep it from being unfair to to make deficit reduction too big a burden on social security and medicare and other government programs. the president will come out here, i presume, and tell lawmakers he wants them to get a deal. because of course, what we are looking at is the august 2 deadline for raising the nation's debt ceiling. and there is no deficit reduction deal by then, we could presumably have a default, unless lawmakers agree to raise the debt ceiling without a deficit reduction agreement. something that republicans are reluctant to do. >> chris: we have been getting reporting from the house producer chad pegram, wendell, and he indicates one

of the hold-up apparently is the gang of six, the six bipartisan, three republican, three democratic senators came out with their report this week which had revenue about $1 trillion in revenue that would be added. this was different from the plan that was being negotiated between the president and speaker boehner. and that caused a whole new set of disagreement, and that let speaker boehner in the last half hour to announce that he is breaking off the talks. >> reporter: there were different measures how much each plan would save. in fact, democrats and republicans differed about each other figures. with time running out, i would imagine that speaker boehner decided to take his chances with senate republicans and democrats. he said that there is some agreement across the party lines within the senate. it may be, however, that the only thing that can pass that body is the proposal by the

majority leader harry reid and majority leader -- minority leader mitch mcconnell to allow him to raise the debt ceiling vetoes the congressional attempt from preventing him to do so. it sounds complicated but the effect is put blame for raising the debt ceiling on the president and force three votes over the next year, three different times of debate in doing that. chris? >> chris: now, we have already gotten, we have just gotten while you were speaking, wendell, the two-minute warning. so folks, stay right here. we believe the president will be coming in the briefing room now in about a minute-and-a-half. what you are talking about, then, as perhaps the only thing to keep us from default on august 2 would be the so-called plan "b," the mcconnell plan, as you say would give the president debt limit increase without perhaps any spending cuts. the problem has been would house republicans go along with that, because they of course are saying they were elected in 2010 to come here

and cut the deficit. >> reporter: that is true. that would require the speaker to convince them that the political pain, the democrats and the president would suffer would be worth their going along with this. certainly would not gain the votes of tea party members. but it might gain enough of the votes of other house republicans, that they would, the plan would semily pass. i believe the plan requires two-third majority of the senate to overturn the president's veto. but you're right, it would need some republicans to pass the house, chris. >> chris: well, we apparently have about 30 seconds, if they keep to their two-minute schedule for the president to come out. an amazing series of developments. interestingly enough, when the day began he seemed to have most of his problems with the democrats. because they were upset that the plan that he seemed to be working out with speaker boehner would call for the big spending cut, big cut in entitlement and they were howling that it seemed to be

all spending cut and not enough revenue increases. of course, that has been the hold up all along. you see the president of the united states walking in the white house briefing room. >> good evening. i want to give you an update about the current situation about the debt ceiling. it just got a call about a half hour ago from speaker boehner. who indicated that he was going to be walking away from the negotiations that we have been engaged in here at the white house for a big deficit reduction and debt reduction package. and i thought it would be useful for me to just give you some insight in to where we were and why i think that we should have moved forward with a big deal. semily what we had offered speaker boehner was over $1 trillion in cuts to discretionary spending. both domestic, and defense. we then offered conditional

$650 billion in cuts to entitlement programs. medicare, medicaid, social security. we believe that it was possible to shape those in a way that preserved the integrity of the system, made them available for the next generation, and did not affect current beneficiaries in an adverse way. in addition, what we sought was revenues that were actually less than what the gang of six signed off on. so you had a bipartisan group of senators, including republicans who are in leaders in the senate. calling for what effectively was about $2 trillion above the republican baseline that they have been working off of. what we said was give us $1.2 trillion in additional revenues.

which could be accomplished without hiking taxes -- tax rates. but could simply be accomplished by eliminating loopholes, eliminating deductions. and engaging in a tax reform process that could have lowered rates generally while broadening the base. so, let me reiterate what we were offering. we were offering a deal that called for as much discretionary savings, as the gang of six. we were calling for taxes that were less than what the gang of six had proposed. we were calling for modifications to entitlement programs would have saved just as much over the ten-year window. in other words, this was an extraordinarily fair deal.

if it was unbalanced, it was unbalanced in the direction of not enough revenue. but in the interest of being serious about deficit reduction, i was willing to take a lot of heat from my party. i spoke to democratic leaders yesterday. and although they didn't sign off on a plan, they were willing to engage in serious negotiations. despite a lot of heat from a lot of interest groups around the country. in order to make sure that we actually dealt with this problem. it is hard to understand why speaker boehner would walk away from this kind of deal. and frankly, if you look at the commentary out there, there are a lot of republicans that are puzzled as to why it couldn't get done. in fact, there are republican voters out there who are puzzled why it couldn't get done. because the fact of the matter

is the vast majority of the american people believe we should have a balanced approach. if you do not have any revenues, as the most recent republican plan that has been put forward both in the house and the senate proposed, if you have no revenues at all, what that means is more of a burden on seniors. more drastic cuts to education. more drastic cuts to research. a bigger burden on services that are going to middle class families all across the country. and it essentially asks nothing of corporate jet owners, asks nothing of oil and gas companies. it asks nothing from folks like me who have done extremely well. and can afford to do a little bit more. in other words, if you don't have revenues, the entire

thing ends up being tilted on the backs of the poor, and middle class families. the majority of americans don't agree on that approach. so, here is what we are going to do. we have now run out of time. i told speaker boehner, i've told democratic leader nancy pelosi. i've told harry reid. i told mitch mcconnell i want them here at 11:00 tomorrow. we have run out of time and they will have to explain to me how we are going to avoid default. they can come up with any plans that they want and bring them up here and we will work on them. the only bottom line that i have is that we have to extend this debt ceiling through the next election. in to 2013. the reason for it, is we've now seen how difficult it is

to get any kind of deal done. the economy is already weakened. and the notion that five or six or eight months from now we will be in a better position to try to solve this problem makes no sense. in addition, if we can't come up with a serious plan for actual deficit and debt reduction, and all we're doing is extenting the debt ceiling for another six, seven, eight months, then the probability of downgrading, the u.s. credit are increased. that will be an additional clout for the economy. and make it more difficult for us and more difficult for businesses to create jobs that the american people so desperately need. so they will come down here at 11:00 tomorrow. i expect them to have an answer in terms of how they intend to get this thing done over the course of the next

week. the american people expect action. i continue to believe that a package that is balanced, and actually had serious debt and deficit reduction is the right way to go. the american people, i think, are fed up with political posturing. and an inability for politicians to take responsible action. as opposed to dodge responsibility. i'll take questions. >> thank you, you said you want leaders back at 11:00 to give you answer about the path forward. what is your answer about the path forward? what does it say about your relationship with speaker boehner? >> well, with respect to my relationship with speaker boehner. we have always had a cordial relationship. we had very intense negotiations. i'm going to have my team brief you exactly on how the

negotiations proceeded. up until some time early today when i couldn't get a phone call returned, my expectation was that speaker boehner was going to be willing to go to his caucus, and ask them to do the tough thing but the right thing. i think it has been difficult for speaker boehner to do that. i been left at the altar now a couple of times. one of the question that the republican party is going to have to ask itself is can they say yes to anything? can they say yes to anything? keep in mind, the republican party said that the single most important thing facing the country is deficit and debts. we have now put forward a package that would

significantly cut deficit and debt. the biggest deficit package we have seen in a very long time and it is accomplished without raising individual tax rates. it's accomplished in a way compatible with the no-tax pledge that a bunch of folks signed on to, because we were mindful they boxed themselves in. we tried to find a way for them to generate revenues in a way that dead not put them in a bad spot -- that did not put them in a bad spot. so the question is what can you say yes to? if their only answer is what they have presented which is a package that effectively would require massive cuts to social security, to medicare and domestic spending, with no revenue whatsoever, not asking anything from the wealthiest or corporations that make

record profits, if that is their only answer then it will be difficult for us to figure out where to go. because that is what the american people are looking for. some compromise. some willingness to put the partisanship aside. some willingness to ignore talk radio, or ignore activists in our res speculative bases. and do the right thing. to their credit, nancy pelosi, harry reid, the democratic leadership, they sure did not like the plan that we were proposing today. but they were at least willing to engage in the conversation because they understood how important it was for us to solve the problem. so far i not seen capacity of the house republicans in particular to make the tough decisions. so then the question becomes

where is the leadership? or alternatively, how serious are you actually about debt and deficit reduction? or do you simply want it as a campaign ploy going in the next election? in terms of where we go next, here is the one thing we've got to do. at minimum, we have to increase the debt ceiling. at minimum. i think we need to do more than that. as i said before, the republican leader mcconnell and the senate put forward a plan that said he is going to go and give me the responsibility to raise the debt ceiling. that way folks in congress can vote against it but it gets done. i am willing to take responsibility. that is my job. so if they want to give me the responseability to do it, i'm happy to do it. but what we are not going to do is continue to play games and string this along for

another eight, nine months. and then have to go through this whole exercise over again. that we are not going to do. jessica? >> mr. president, can you assure the american people they will get their social security checks on august 3? if not, who is to blame? >> well, when it comes to all the checks, not just social security, veterans, people with disabilities. about 70 million checks are sent out each month. if we default, then we are going to have to make adjustments. i'm already consulting with secretary geithner in terms of what the consequences would be. we should not be in that kind of scenario. if congress, and in particular, the house republicans are not willing to

make sure that we avoid default, then i think it is fair to say that they would have to take responsibility for whatever problems arise in those payments. because let me repeat. i am not interested in finger pointing or blame but i want facts to speak for themselves. we put forward a plan more generous to republican concerns than a bipartisan plan that was supported by a number of republican senators, including at least one that is in republican leadership in the senate. now, i'll leave it up to the american people to make a determination as to how fair that is. if the leadership cannot come to an agreement how we move forward, they will hold all of us accountable. that shouldn't be an option.

that should not be an option. i get letters from people saying at the end of every month i to skip meals, senior citizens on social security who are hanging on by a thread. folks with severe disabilities who are desperate. every single month to try to figure out how they are going to make ends meet. not just those folks. you have business contractors who are providing service to federal government and wonder are they going to get paid? what does it do in terms of their payrolls? a huge number of people that interact with the federal government. even if you don't, even if you are not recipient of social security and even if you don't get veteran benefit or disability, imagine what it

does to economy when suddenly 70 million checks are put at risk. i mean if you are a business out there, that is not going to be good for economic growth. that is the number one concern of the american people. we've got to get it done. not an option not to do it. >> are you confident? >> i am confident because i can't believe that congress would be that irresponsible they would not send a package to avoid self-inflicted boom to economy at a time things are difficult. scott horfor. >> mr. president, can you explain why you were offering a deal that was more generous than the gang of six that you seemed to be embracing on tuesday? >> because what became apparent is speaker boehner had difficulty in his caucus.

there is a group of his caucus that actually think default would be okay. they said they would not vote for increasing the debt ceiling under any circumstances. i understand how they get themselves stirred up. the sharp ideological lines that they have drawn. ultimately, my responsibility is to make sure that we avoid extraordinary difficulties to american people and american businesses. unfortunately, when you are in negotiations you don't get 100% of what you want. you may not get 60 or 70% of what you want. but i was willing to try to persuade democratic leadership as well as democratic members of congress.

that even a deal that is not as balanced as i think it should be is better than no deal at all. i was willing to persuade democrats that getting a handle on debt and deficit reduction is important to democrats, just as much as it's important to republicans. frankly, a lot of democrats aren't persuaded by that. if you are a progressive, you should want to get the fiscal house in order. once we go, it allows to us have a serious conversation about investments we need to make, like infrastructure, rebuilding the roads and bridges and airports, like investing more in the college education and make sure that we are focused on the kind of research and technology to help us win the future. easier to do that with the fiscal house in order.

that was an argument i was willing to make to skeptical democrats as you saw yesterday. ultimately, that is what we should expect from the leaders. if this was easy, it would have already been done. what people are disappointed where, all the talk of the next generation and making sacrifices, when it comes to doing something difficult, folks walk away. last point i'll make here, i gone out of my way to say that both parties have to make compromises. this indicateed the degree of which a democratic president has been willing to make the tough compromises. when you go out and write your

story, this is not how this was the usual food fight between the democrats and republicans. a lot of democrats stepped up. in ways that were not advantageous politically. so we have shown ourselves willing to do the tough stuff. on an issue that republicans ran on. nora? >> mr. president, there seems to be an extraordinary breakdown of trust involved here. i wonder if you can address from the republicans that there was a framework and a deal agreed with the chief of staff and treasury secretary about the certain number of revenue, that the republicans had agreed to that. then after you brought that to your party and the discussion was at the goal line was moved. is this an example that the

goal line moved and that led to a breakdown in trust? >> we will do a pick doc and go through papers a walk you through the process. what this came down to was there doesn't seem to be a capacity for them to say yes. what is absolutely true is we wanted more revenue than they initially offered. but as you will see, the spending cuts that we were prepared to engage in were at least as significant as the spending cuts that you have seen in a whole range of bipartisan proposals, and we had basically agreed within $10 billion, $20 billion. we were within that range. so, that wasn't the reason it broke down. we were consistent in saying

that it was going to be important for to us have at least enough revenue that we could protect current ben fish years of -- beneficiaries of social security or current beneficiaries of medicare. that we weren't slashing medicaid so sharply that states suddenly were going to have to throw people off the healthcare rolls. we were consistent in that. i want to be clear. i'm not suggesting that we had an agreement that was sign, sealed and delivered. the parties were still apart as recently as yesterday. when you look at the overall package, there is no changing of the goalpost here. there has been consistency on the part saying that is where we're willing to make tough cuts and we're willing to take on the heat for the difficult cuts but there has to be some balance in the process. what i said publicly is what i said privately. i done it consistently throughout the process.

with respect to the breakdown in trust, i think that we have operated above board consistently. there hasn't been any surpris surprises. it seems to have the inability to the house of the representatives to arrive at any kind of position that compromises any of their ideological preferences. none. there are a number of members of the caucus have been clear about that. >> they were willing to -- [ inaudible ] revenue about that? >> absolutely. what you saw, again, you'll see this from the description of the deal.

what they agree is to get back to a baseline. this starts getting technical. but there were about $800 billion in revenue that would be available. when you have a ratio of $4 in cut for every $1 in revenue, that is hard to stomach. we think it's important to make sure that whatever additional revenue is in there their cupboard, the amount of money taken out of entitlement programs. if i am saying to the footure recipient of social security or medicare you are going to have to make adjustments, it's important that we are also willing to make adjustments when it comes to corporate jet owners or oil and gas produce producers. or people making millions or

billions of dollars. wendell? where is wendell? wednesday is not here. ludwig? >> thank you. you said your bottom line has been a big deal. that is not going to happen. are you going to be willing to go back to just raising the debt ceiling? >> i think i have been consistently saying in the press room and everywhere that it is important for to us raise the debt ceiling. we don't have an option on that. so if that is the best that congress can do, i will sign an extension of the debt creeling to take it through -- debt creeling to take it through 2013. i don't think it's enough. we should do more. the bare minimum, the floor of what the american people expect us to do.

so i would like to see us do more. when i meet with the leadership tomorrow i'm going to say let's do more. if they tell me that is the best they can do, then i will sign an extension that goes to 2013 and make the case to the american people we have to continue going out there and solving this problem. it's the right thing to do. it's time to do it. we can't keep putting it off. >> you suggested that speaker boehner didn't return phone calls this afternoon. can you elaborate on that? >> i'm less concerned about me having to wait for my phone call returned than i am the message that i received when i got the phone call. i'm going to make this last question. go ahead. >> the markets are closed right now obviously. what assurances can you give people on wall street, are you going to be reaching out to some people on wall street when monday comes we don't see a reaction to the news that is developing right now? >> i think it's very important that the leadership

understands that wall street will be opening on monday and we better have some answers during the course of the next several days. >> what can you say to people watching working on wall street who might find this a bit alarming perhaps? >> well, i think what you should say -- well, here is what i say. i remain confident that we will get an extension of the debt limit a we will not default. i am confident of that. i am less confident at this point that people are willing to step up to the plate and actually deal with the underlying problem of debt and deficits. that requires tough choices. that is what we were sent here to do. i mean the debt ceiling, that is a formality. historically, this has not even been an issue. it's an unpleasant vote but it has been a routine vote that congress does periodically.

it was raised 18 times when ronald reagan was president. ronald reagan said default is not an option. that it would be hugely damaging for the prestige of the united states. we shouldn't even consider it. so, that is the easy part. we should have done that six months ago. the hard part is actually dealing with the underlying debt and deficits. doing in a way that is fair. that is all the american people are looking for. some fairness. i can't tell you how many letters and e-mails i get, including from republican voters who say look, we know that neither party is blameless when it comes to how the debt and deficit developed. there has been a lot of blame to spread around. but we sure hope you don't just balance the budget on the backs of seniors. we sure hope that we are not

slashing our commitment to make sure kids can go to college. we sure hope that we are not suddenly throwing a bunch of poor kids off the medicaid rolls so they can't get basic preventive services to keep them out of the emergency room. that is a they're looking for is some fairness. now what you are going to hear i suspect is well, you know, if you, if the senate is prepared to pass the "cut, cap and balance" bill, the republican plan, then somehow we can solve this problem. that is serious debt reduction. it turns out, actually, that the plan that speaker boehner and i were talking about, was comparable in terms of deficit reduction. the difference was we didn't put all the burden on the people who are least able to protect themselves, who don't have lobbyists in this town, who don't have lawyers working on the tax code for them.

working stiffs out there, ordinary folks who are struggling every day. and they know they are getting a raw deal. they are mad at everybody about it. they are mad at democrats and republicans. because they know somehow no matter how hard they work they don't seem to be able to keep up. what they are looking for is somebody who is willing to look out for them. thar is all they're looking for. -- that is all they're looking for. for us not to be keeping those folks in mind every single day, when we're up here, for us to be more worried about what some talk radio host show says or some columnist says or what pledge we signed back when we were trying to run, or worrying about having a

primary fight. for us to be thinking in those terms instead of thinking about those folks, is inexcusable. i mean the american people are just desperate for folks who are willing to put aside politics just for a minute. and try to get some stuff done. so when nora asked or somebody else asked, you know, why was i willing to go along with the deal that wasn't optimal for my perspective? it was because even if i didn't think the deal was perfect, at least it would show that this place is serious. that we are willing to take on a responsibility even when it's tough. that we are willing to step up, even when the folks who help get us elected may disagree. you know, at some point i

think if you want to be a leader, then you got to lead. thank you very much. >> chris: well, that was quite an appearance by the president. almost 35 minutes in the briefing room. an extraordinary appearance by the president. clearly frustrated. and lashing out at republicans. i think there were three main points. i'm going to bring in wendell goler to talk about these. first of all, wendell, the president laid out what he thought was a reasonable plan, what he said was the plan to work out with the republican speaker of the house, john boehner. $1 trillion in cut and discretionary spending, including military spending. $650 billion in cut to entitlement he said would not hurt current recipients but cut to current entitlement spending, social security, medicare and medicaid. total of $1.65 trillion in

spending cuts. $1.2 trillion in revenue increases that would have come not from raising revenue but from closing loopholes and doing away with deductions, tax deductions. he said this would all have been part of the tax reform that he hope to see the tax rates being lowered. that is point one. point two, the president said that clearly frustrated he said he is calling all of the top leaders, house and senate, republican and democrat to the white house at 11:00 a.m. tomorrow. basically to say folks, we've got at that point ten days until we hit the august 2 deadline. what are we going to do to avoid default? for the first time indicated that default is a real possibility. he said he has begun consulting with treasury secretary geithner about possible ways to deal with default if it gets to that point. then finally, i think it's

fair to say that he lashed out at republicans, tried to put all of the blame on republicans. said can they say yes to anything? and we haven't seen the capacity of house republicans to make tough decisions. the only other point i would add to this is we have wire reports that the republican aides are saying that the big hold-up here is the president's revenue figure changed after he saw how much the gang of six, bipartisan group of senators, was willing to cut. that he then wanted more in revenue increases. that seemed to be, according to republicans, where the talks derailed. he was asked about that in this briefing and he said no, he had not moved the goalpost. wendell, your reaction? we have both seen extraordinary scenes in the briefing room but that is in the top ten. >> i think it's important to look at this in the context of yesterday's almost meltdown by the democratic caucus.

when what the white house called misinformation appeared on the wires and the newspaper websites that indicated the president was prepared to agree to spending cuts without this revenue component. california senator dianne feinstein said people on the democratic side were as frustrated as she has seen in all of her time on the hill. now what we are getting from republicans right now from speaker boehner for example indicates that all of his contact with the president in recent days, "the purpose of this dialogue was to see if we could identify a path forward that would implement the principles of "cut, cap and balance" in a manner that could secure bipartisan support and be signed in to law. but it was clear from the start that the "cut, cap and balance" plan was not going to get through the senate. that was tabled today." the president really threw out a huge warning when he said the markets are closed now but they are going to open in a couple of days. the congress and the white

house are going to need to show them something. it may not be until -- they may not wait until august 2 to begin downgrading the country credit rating. that would cause the interest rates to rise. >> chris: wendell goler reporting from the white house. thank you. we understand that speaker boehner will be responding on camera. stay right here at fox news. because you will want to hear what speaker boehner has to say in response to the president's comments. we would like to point out this weekend, tune in to "fox news sunday" where i will sit down with treasury secretary tim geithner, that is sunday after the saturday meeting and we will get the latest on the debt crisis and what might happen when the markets hope on monday. we will join the panel, they will come here and join me to talk about all of this, the extraordinary development, during this hour. when we come right back after this break. engine revving ] [ male announcer ] 125 years ago... we invented the automobile. ♪ and 80,000 patents later, we're still reinventing it.

♪ it's no coincidence that the oldest car company h the youngest and freshest line in the luxury class. mercedes-benz. see your authorized mercedes-benz dealer for exceptional offers on the e-class. ♪ for exceptional offers on the e-class. motorcycles, boats, even rv's. nobody knows where he got his love for racing. all we know is, it started early. casey mears, driver of the number thirteen geico toyota camry. geico, saving people money on more than just car insurance.

we're putting them to the test against the speed of a rescue unit. go ! they're downloading a music album. the first network to finish gets rescued. does your phone know that we're racing ? done ! verizon's done ! i've got seven left ! the fastest networin america. verizon. built so you can rule the air. now powering the lg revolution.

there was no agreement, publicly, privately, never an agreement and frankly, not

close to an agreement. >> chris: well, that was house speaker john boehner earlier today. denying what seemed to be a deal that was in the making between the president and john boehner. a deal that now completely collapsed. so have talks between the, "and boehner. although the president will be speaking to all the congressional leaders at 11:00 a.m. tomorrow tomorrow at the white house. stephen hayes, charles lane, "washington post," and syndicated columnist charles krauthammer is our panel. we have heard one side of the argue in the the first half of the show, the argue fire department the president. one thing struck me in the deal that the president talked about. he talked about $1..65 trillion in cuts. most of the deals were 4-to-1 spendk cut to revenue increases. this was almost 50/50. >> right. that suggests that when he was making the arguments that the

democrats were willing to do the difficult things and the republicans are the ones that backed, not as it a -- balked, not as it was on the surface. this is quint essential president obama blame-shifting. the house republicans weren't willing to do anything, after republicans did nothing but for six months present a plan after plan, ryan budget or cut, cap and balance. one thing after another. the republicans offered plan after plan after plan. democrats haven't offered a budget in the senate. the president hasn't been specific on entitlement reform. this is the most pressing issue in the country according to him. he is still offering zero specifics on his plan. i think we may have had an interesting moment in the press conference that came when the president said in response to a question from noro o'donnell, that he was commited to showing what had actually happened behind the scenes, committed to showing the paperwork, committed to providing the details.

i wonder if the president did get specific on entitlement reform, on his plan, if there is such a plan, doesn't it commit him to sharing it with the public after he said so, so publicly in a press conference? >> chris: charles, your reaction? >> well, a furious president obama. and what you wonder after watching that is what is left to talk about tomorrow morning at this meeting? >> chris: well, they have to find a way for the country not to go in default. >> exactly. but you wonder if the well hasn't been so poisoned by what what gonen in the last 24 hours that we don't know exactly what has gone on, whether we can get to solving the problem. for the first time in the whole process, i am beginning to doubt that we really will hit august 2 debt ceiling deadline. one of the unfortunate things about this press conference is that i understand he is trying to portray himself as the guy who wants to compromise and wants a balanced approach. he is the adult in the room.

but that last rhetoric that went on at the end there, i don't think contributed to that. >> chris: that was last and first. i mean from the beginning, charles, he said, you know can the republicans say yes to anything? they haven't shown, seen the capacity of the house republicans to make the duff decisions. i mean, he didn't just burn all the bridges he nayponned them. >> this is obama at his sanctimonious, demagogic, self-righteous and arrogant. given the baseline, it wasn't a pretty sight. he started out by summoning the leaders of congress. summoning on them at 11:00, who does he think he is? executive and congress are coequal. the way he demanded their appearance in the oval office i thought was disgraceful.

they're coequal. he said that he set forth a plan. he has set forth nothing. nor has the democratic controlled senate. as steve indicateed the republicans has offered a detailed plan. the ryan plan in the house. cut, cap and balance this time around. president offer nothing except if you go in the back room, my staff will give you ticktock, detail of everything i was supposed to have given. he has never once spoken about real cuts. lastly, what was interesting is even at the late date where he says that the fate of the republic hangs on the debt ceiling extension, he said if given a short extension of say half a year, i won't accept it. why? because he says i want this to go past election day. that is self-serving and political. he pretends he is the one who is not interested in politics. >> chris: we have to break

in here but we have much more with the panel on this extraordinary appearance by the president and where the debt negotiations go after this quick break. an accident doesn't have to slow you down. with better car replacement ailable only with liberty mutual auto insurance, if your car's totaled, we give you the money for a car one model year newer. to learn more, visit us today. responsibility. what's your policy?

♪ ♪ >> chris: we're back now with our panel. well, guys, despite the inflammatory rhetoric coming from the president, and pretty sharp rhetoric coming from republicans, especially house republicans they have to sit down and they will sit down at 11:00 a.m. tomorrow, all the congressional leaders with the president. they have to work something out. ten days and counting. what do you see happening? >> it's hard to say. the president clearly embraced mcconnell, the mcconnell plan tonight briefly. saying i don't want to do it but i'll do it if we have to.

this is a tremendous opportunity for house republicans to put together something, short-term plan with trillion cuts or something longer, something that pushes back the date of default to september 30 by selling bonds. being discussed in congress in the house side. right now. this gives republicans an opportunity to present the plan to say here is 219 votes. you didn't want a cut, bap and balance. >> short-term cut in spending matched by equal increase in debt limit? >> exactly. >> chris: charles? >> they vetoed that but they dare him. >> mcconnell and reid working on a mcconnell version with $1.5 trillion spending cut attached and that may get a second look. i want to say something about "cut, cap and balance." this may be a specific plan, it's not a very serious plan. it was never going the pass the senate. they knew it all along. the president may be posturing

today but the plan has been posturing all along. it's not a solution to budget deficit because the balanced budget amendments are full of loopholes that could have been gotten around anyway. >> chris: charles, i know that you and you wrote another interesting column that you advance short-term increase. go to mcconnell plan. because it has buy-in from republicans and democrats in the senate at least. increase debt limit and let president take the haul, take $1 trillion that the biden group agreed to. what do you think of that? >> that will ultimately pass unless republicans pass short-term, cuts only. and adjourn and go home, which obama could not veto. given the catastrophic events he predicts if there is a debt default. this is option one as a republican. if the republicans aren't going to take that chance,

show themselves up for extension for half a year, then we end up on the mcconnell plan and i'm sure that everybody will agree upon it in the end. the president said explicitly he'll accept it. a way out, parachute and deferring everything until after election day and democratic in a sense. it pus the issue to the country, which way do you want to go? >> chris: we have to take another break and we're waiting for house speaker john boehner to come forward and give his response to the president pointed remarks today. back in a moment. [ male announcer ] this...is the network --

a network of possibilities. in here, the planned combination of at&t and t-mobile would deliver our next generation mobile broadband experience to 55 million more amecans, many in small towns and rural communities, giving them a new choice. we'll deliver better service, with thousands of new cell sites... f greater access to all the things you want, whenever you want them. it's the at&t network... and what's possible in here is almost impossible to say.

>> up until sometime early today when i couldn't get a phone call returned, my expectation was

that speaker boehner was going to be willing to go to his caucus and ask them to do the tough thing but the right thing. i think it has proven difficult for speaker boehner to do that i have been left at the altar now a couple of times. >> chris: well, strong letter to follow. folks, let me tell you where we are right now. this is turning to an extended edition of "special report." we are going to stay on the air until house speaker john boehner comes out before live cameras to respond to the camera's very sharp remarks. we believe that's going to happen in the next few minutes. so, we'll be here for that let me talk briefly about what the president said today. he came into the briefing room about 6:00 p.m. eastern, spoke and then took questions for about 35 minutes. really three points. first of all, he said that the negotiations between him and speaker boehner have broken down. he said they have been talking about $1.65 trillio